Place Order

Managerial Accounting

  1. Managerial Accounting
  • While at work one day, you hear your co-worker state: “The main objective of a firm’s budget is to see how much cash the company will have in the bank at the end of the year.” Do you agree with her comments? Why, or why not?
  • Respond to Nicholas

While I understand the perspective of our colleague regarding the end-of-year cash position being the primary purpose of a budget, I must respectfully contend that such a view is somewhat reductive. Budgeting, in a comprehensive organizational context, serves multifaceted purposes. It is not merely a predictive tool for ascertaining year-end cash balances but a strategic instrument employed for several vital functions. Primarily, a budget acts as a framework for fiscal planning, enabling optimal resource allocation aligned with organizational priorities. Concurrently, it offers a mechanism for control: by juxtaposing actual outcomes with budgetary allocations, we can discern variances, facilitating timely course corrections. Moreover, the budget serves as a metric for performance evaluation, allowing for an assessment of managerial and departmental efficacy relative to set fiscal targets. It also ensures synchronization across various organizational departments, promoting a unified approach to achieving overarching financial goals. Furthermore, in decision-making processes, the budget is instrumental, guiding determinations on project initiations or deferments. Thus, while the end-of-year cash position remains an important aspect, suggesting it is the principal objective oversimplifies the nuanced role of budgeting in contemporary corporate operations.

 

  1. International Management
  • As you read about quality imperative (pp. 292–293 in your eTextbook), you will see the mention of Apple turning to OLED displays to resolve quality issues in previous iPhone models. You might be surprised to learn, however, that Samsung was the first to introduce OLED display technology in their cell phones, years ahead of Apple, to help it gain a larger market share. Both highlight different applications of a quality imperative.

Share an example of a global company whose strategy is to achieve higher quality in order to increase market share and profitability. Discuss the improvements your selected company made and whether that strategy was deemed successful in satisfying company objectives.

  • Respond to Nicholas

Looking into a company that has changed is vision and value to achieve a larger market share and gain higher success within the market I would go with Under Amour. Initially UA was not a large shoe manufacturer and they were targeting more of a sports or athletic vision across the nation. They started in MD and initially were in the clothing industry ahead of their time with the offerings and pricing being a bit higher then normal for a comparable item made with less quality materials they decided to make some changes. Just as its largest competitor did Nike they started to target athletes to represent their products and create new product lines. They started a shoe that was designed for the gym, then they created a basketball shoe. Both had little upfront sales however they have started to sign some key athletes as Stephen Curry and Joel Embid both huge names which now impact the basketball world and people are buying these shoes. For the actual gym gear both shorts shirts and shoes we know “The Rock” and what he has done for UA. He is the Jordan brand for UA. They have introduced a golf gear as well, signing people like Jordan Spieth which is one of the biggest golfers. In the football line they have Tom Brady working with them, and he is the GOAT at quarterback.

 

Looking to see if this was all successful and worth the effort in my opinion I would say yes. This brand is now one of the largest brands in all of sports, and is a direct rival to Nike, Reebok, and Adidas. These things are not cheap and really Nike started this model with the Jordan Brand and signing the big names creating a desire to be a part of something greater. They are grossing around $5 billion US annually and have around 11k employees. This market isn’t easy to get into and be successful but these company saw the writing on the wall and has made a huge leap an gain year over year remaining strong globally. They have remained true to their value of the materials and stand behind their product for the long term.

 

  1. Global Strategic Management
  • Recall “Mini Case 4: Nike’s Core Competency: The Risky Business of Creating Heroes.” The case discusses the risks associated with using celebrity athletes in marketing. Discuss another company that experienced negative situations with using celebrity athletes. Do you believe they handled the fall-out well? Why, or why not?
  • Respond to Ashley

Hertz rental company experienced backlash and a decrease in business due to their partnership with O.J. Simpson. In 1989 Simpson had been a spokesperson for the company for a decade. He was accused of assault and battery against his wife Nicole Brown and despite backlash, Hertz decided to keep Simpson on as its spokesman. Nicole Simpson agreed that she had instigated the altercation and so the company did not feel compelled to take action against Simpson. This created controversy and a drop in sales. The company was stuck trying to figure out new ways to make their customers happy and revive their brand. Simpson stayed on with the company until the 1994 trial for the murder of Nicole Simpson. They cut ties with him even after he was acquitted. They have recently brought Simpson back on for a new program they have for wrongly convicted inmates. This case was crazy and is still very well known today. I think that they did not handle the situation well. To me, it felt like they promoted spousal abuse. Even though Nicole said she instigated it she did not touch Simpson and he lashed out and beat her. This later showed in the murder trial how tumultuous the marriage actually was. Their dropping him during the trial was the right decision because murder is a huge blow to marketing and brand appeal. The recent partnership in the name of falsely accused convicts may be a smart move but it will undoubtedly cause controversy for those who don’t believe the convictions were false. Overall the company is still in business so all of the backlash and money lost was not enough to end them.

 

 

 

https://www.mediafire.com/file/b0fsat1aqtgaked/DQ+5+.docx/file